Westministenders: Canada Plus and the Transition Phase

[RedToothBrush]

As we approach the 31st January, we slowly tick towards exit and transition.

Things are not yet signed off though the No Deal planning has quietly been stood down with no press release and the government have said they won't talk about trade deals post 31st Jan because the public are bored of them and don't understand.

The new EU president has said that the UK doesn't have time to make a full deal with the EU before 31st December with a deadline which isn't flexible.

We still have no idea what the government plans are. We still have many EU citizens feeling very vulnerable.

Perhaps we should start talking about this rather than Royals for a couple of weeks...

Far from letting the bells ring out, they seem to be trying to let this pass with the minimum of fuss.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51244126

Make Brexit Go Away?

I strongly suspect BJ did not read the WA through before signing

MNers castigate people for not reading the small print, but the WA is all normal print, just long, like most other international treaties between countries

BJ doesn't bother with "detail"
He assumes that charm, lies and bluff will always get him through

Wotcha, Westmininstenders - I'm entirely ignoring the Bollocks that is Brexit, apart from expectantly looking forward to the Chief Rat delivering on his promised Brexitannian glory in the Year of the Rat.

Aibu to think that if Unite supported R L-B becomes Labour leader we may as well all pack up as we'll be living in a virtual one party state?

I don't think RLB will have the same issues ad Corbyn.

The big problem with him was 4 years of continuous media attacks that went back over every little thing he did over 30 something years.

The policies weren't unpopular when not attached to him.

Yeah right.

actually i think the right are way over confident about retaining these seats and utterly wrong about the reasons for the change. Every day on here I see them saying it was wokeness, identity politics and the rejection of it that was the major reason.

It wasnt.

"The big problem with him was 4 years of continuous media attacks that went back over every little thing he did over 30 something years."
They were significant things he did as an adult and sadly for him other adults were adults when he said and did them. If you are too young to remember or weren't even born I imagine it might look like meejah attacks on him. But it was generally reporting his track record of shitness.

and a hell of a lot of the stuff was manufactured, taking things out of context.

Oh and the treatment of him and Boris for similar things was utterly skewed. Scruffy hungover boris lays the wreath the wrong way up and gets his timing wrong at remembrance day, naff all hysteria.

Corbyn wears a rain coat... " Terrorist sympathiser disrespects the war dead".

I think that's probably the kind of attitude that, if prevalent in the Labour Party, underlines my concern about the future state of politics. Labour as victims basically. Corbyn a good man, just much maligned. No. That's just wishful thinking.

No one claimed to be a victim, the coverage of the two incidents is directly comparable.

Corbyn was much maligned, and under constant media attack for four years.

But then you know so was the labour leader before, and no one cared about the veiled antisemitism in the press against him either.

What baffles me is the constant revisionsim about what was the major issue turning this election.

What was it then?

The newspaper and media presentation of Corbyn/Labour was just a fraction of what caused Labour's defeat.

And Labour supporters absolutely did present themselves as victims!

And the right will be right to be confident if Labour continues on the same path.

The right paint themselves as victims every day, note Laurence Fox.

The paper coverage of Corbyn across 4 years made a massive difference. The two issues were Brexit and Corbyn, and with Corbyn.

In the door step the reasons against Corbyn all came from the press coverage, terrorist sympathiser, anti semite, against the forces etc.

Being revisionist and saying it was the policies or anti woke resentment is entirely inaccurate.

The number 1 problem is Corbyn's Labour weren't actually interested in winning an election.

And again, constantly blaming the press is painting yourself as victims.

If the right are "victims" they appear to be winning "victims".

Ah so in which way weren't they interested?

Again focusing against what is in all the surveys and being revisonist.

Brexit and Corbyn were the issues. Corbyn issues were mostly repeated press stuff.

And yes the right are winning victims, its a clever policy to make powerful majorities feel like oppressed minorities

People did not vote for Corbyn because his message was incoherent on Brexit and over complicated on everything else.
There was no soundbite that voters could get hold of.
That was a crass failing that RLB will not rectify.

Maylis, you cannot deny that Corbyn was an anti Semite. He refused the accepted definition of antisemitism.
And he was photographed several,times with the IRA and with Hezbollah who he referred to as friends.

He has always been against our armed forces.

The press have only reported what he has said or done.

Agree with maylis and it's delusional to suggest it doesn't have a huge effect. Why else would they pay so much for it?

Exactly the same thing happened in Australia. Same online team too. These people have the same backers.

Our legal system is about two decades behind what is happening online in elections. We aren't seeing it unless we're in target seats (i'm not but I have friends that were and the facebook stuff they showed me was appalling, relentless, and lies)

Read Edward Snowden.

And yes, I am bored to tears of the victim status of the "winners". Oh poor us we were forced to vote tory and now people are critical of us. Oh we've got everything we voted for and we don't want anyone to even discuss it any more.

I can deny that Corbyn was an antisemite, the reason behind the delay ( not refusal) to accept the IHRA definition was due to legitimate oncerns that it could be used to label criticism of Israel.

Note at the same time the Tories hadn't accepted it either. No outcry there.

The IRA ? Which members? When? Where?

I note that a leading minister in the Tory government made antisemitic remarks, no where near as much fuss made (nor about associations with antisemitic organisations or individuals)

.
He was never against our armed forces.

I'm not as confident as malylis that it will swing back at another election though. I think it depends on whether this stuff becomes common knowledge in the meantime, whether people actually care, and then things like what happens with brexit and the climate crisis. They've used brexit very effectively, I don't see why they couldn't weaponise another issue in the same way.

Climate crisis will worsen all refugee situations so the rightwing pushback may be even harder in a few years time. that's the pessimistic take. optimistically we would get together globally and do something about it! It's going to require a huge effort to overcome vested interests there though and australia usa and uk at least have been voting very much in line so far... :(

I'm not confident it will switch back. But I feel the crowing about them remaining is a little over confident

I'm one of those who can remember Corbyn's actions going back to when he first became an MP in 1983
He reaaly was unfit to be leader

Back in 2015, some moderate MPs, including centrist ones, added their votes to his nomination for leader, to show how fair-minded they were that all views would be heard
The supposed adults virtue-signalled and landed us all with a dim-witted perpetual student agitator as Opposition Leader